No Gilbert. The “medieval ages” are generally taken to have started in the 5th century, with the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The 6th century is thus well into the medieval period. More importantly, it is half a millennium after Jesus’ lifetime – so offers no probative evidence whatsoever.
-
There is no evidence supporting the claim that the ‘Shroud of Turin’ was the Image of Edessa.
-
There is therefore no evidence that this shroud was ever in Edessa.
-
Given that the earliest version of the tradition, that of Eusebius, does not mention an image, and the tradition is highly mutable, there is scant evidence that the Image of Edessa even existed.
The Image of Edessa=Shroud of Turin claim is nothing but a deluded Shroud-crank fantasy.
This has all been explained to you previously Gil. So your bringing up Edessa again in support of the Shroud is nothing but blatant sealioning.
This leaves you with the image of the Catacomb of Commodille as a bare, unexplained, contextless outlier – itself dating from 3 centuries after Jesus’ life, so offering no probative evidence.
We are also left with your apparent inability to engage with credible and scholarly sources, like Joan Taylor, on Jesus’ appearance, and your repeated insistence on inflicting credibility-free and inexpert sources like Marino (who in turn cites equally credibility-free and inexpert sources, in a crank echo chamber) on us in their place.
Unless and until you can either marshal credible evidence, or at least credible expert opinion, to support your claims, your claims, be they on the Shroud, Covid, Intelligent Design, or whatever other claims you have been drawn to, will be continued to be viewed as nothing more than empty rhetoric, devoid of any serious content.